Like you Beats, when using darkfield, I get what looks to be better resolution than with brightfield, and get a similar effect with oblique light. I've read various descriptions of what is going on with some sites basically stating that 'darkfield gives better resolution than brightfield'. On the Ol...

Enrico, I'd certainly be interested in the Macro-nikkor set, but I see it has reserved next to it, so I guess someone else is. If it doesn't work out, keep me in mind please.

Jonathan

I was recently fortunate to get a 25 Radiolaria exhibition circle by Klaus Kemp, and today thought I would try imaging it on my Olympus BHB microscope. I used an Olympus 10x UVFL objective, white LED light from below, and an Olympus Aplanat Achromat condenser. The condenser was setup up as oblique t...

Very nicely done. If your oil is a source of fluorescence, Thorlabs currently have Cargille very low fluorescence oil for what looks to be a pretty good price (although keep in mind shipping costs with Thorlabs can soon offset that, so best to buy as part of a larger order). Here's the link - https:...

Lovely photos and thanks for sharing the information on your setup.

Absolutely amazing photos. Thanks for sharing.

Care to share a few postings of your finalized microscope setup? -JW: Sure. The microscope itself is an Olympus BHB and it looks still pretty much as standard. Light source - Zeiss 50W HBO mercury xenon (used for visible down to 313nm). Condenser lens replaced with fused silica. This gives me nice ...

A few diatom images from a range of Brunel test slides. These are transmission images, done using 405nm or 45nm light, with oblique light (Olympus Aplanat Achromat condenser) and with a 60x Olympus Splan Apo NA 1.4 oil immersion objective. Microscope is a modified Olympus BHB and the camera a monoch...

During UV photoraphy, I also meet this phenomenon on the edge of diatoms, I think it's artifact, but don't know how to improve it, focus stacking does not work. I've struggled with it too, which is one of the reasons I tend not to do stacking with these images. I've seen it too - to do with the thi...

when it is in focus in visible light it is way out of focus at 254nm. So there is a lot of trial and error with positioning. Have you tried measuring the difference in focus distances and correcting by that fixed amount when switching from visible to 245nm? I expect the method will fail, but I am c...

Thanks for sharing. I think the details are quite good for a NA 0.2 objective lens. No problem. Yes, it is pretty good for an NA 0.2 objective. I'm struggling with some aspects of the process though. The camera has very little sensitivity that far down into the UV (even though it is a monochrome co...

As some of you know, I've been working on a UV transmission microscope to help with my research into sunscreens and skin cancer prevention. I've also been using it to look at some diatoms using 365nm and 313nm light. When I built it though, I wanted to make sure it would be usable at shorter wavelen...

Vincent Zhang-1968 wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 03, 2022 6:44 pm

During UV photoraphy, I also meet this phenomenon on the edge of diatoms, I think it's artifact, but don't know how to improve it, focus stacking does not work.

I've struggled with it too, which is one of the reasons I tend not to do stacking with these images.

Quick follow up to my previous UVB diatom images. I went back to the slide with a 100x Leitz UV NA 1.2 glycerine immersion objective and got the following at 313nm. Single image, no stacking. One image which was almost the full frame captured and then a crop from original showing part of the top rig...

Thanks for sharing these useful information! I wonder if there is a big difference between nikon UV-F 100X/1.30 and 100X/1.30 Fluor objective lens in UV light tranmission? No problem. While I have not tested the 100x Fluor, I suspect it will be similar in terms of transmission to the UV-F 100x. How...